Scribd
Upload
198 views1 page

Ortega Vs CA

The Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the dissolution of the law partnership of Bito, Misa & Lozada. The Court held that: 1) The partnership agreement made the partnership one at will since it could continue as long as mutually satisfactory. 2) The withdrawal of partner Misa from the firm dissolved the partnership, regardless of whether the withdrawal was done in good or bad faith, as any partner can dissolve a partnership at will. However, a partner who withdraws in bad faith may be liable for damages.

Uploaded by

CeCe Em
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
198 views1 page

Ortega Vs CA

The Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the dissolution of the law partnership of Bito, Misa & Lozada. The Court held that: 1) The partnership agreement made the partnership one at will since it could continue as long as mutually satisfactory. 2) The withdrawal of partner Misa from the firm dissolved the partnership, regardless of whether the withdrawal was done in good or bad faith, as any partner can dissolve a partnership at will. However, a partner who withdraws in bad faith may be liable for damages.

Uploaded by

CeCe Em
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Gregorio Ortega, Tomas del Castillo, Jr. and Benjamin Bacorro v.

CA, SEC and Joaquin Misa


G.R. No. 109248 July 3, 1995
Facts:
Ortega, then a senior partner in the law firm Bito, Misa, and Lozada withdrew in said firm.
He filed with SEC a petition for dissolution and liquidation of partnership.
SEC en banc ruled that withdrawal of Misa from the firm had dissolved the partnership.
Reason: since it is partnership at will, the law firm could be dissolved by any partner atanytime, such as
by withdrawal therefrom, regardless of good faith or bad faith, since nopartner can be forced to continue
in the partnership against his will.
Issue:
1. WON the partnership of Bito, Misa & Lozada (now Bito, Lozada, Ortega & Castillo)is a partnership at
will;
2. WON the withdrawal of Misa dissolved the partnership regardlessof his good or bad faith;
Held:
1. Yes. The partnership agreement of the firm provides that [t]he partnership shallcontinue so long as
mutually satisfactory and upon the death or legal incapacity of one of the partners, shall be continued by
the surviving partners.
2. Yes. Any one of the partners may, at his sole pleasure, dictate a dissolution of the partnership at will
(e.g. by way of withdrawal of a partner). He must, however, act in good faith, not that the attendance of
bad faith can prevent the dissolution of the partnership but that it can result in a liability for damages.

You might also like